Re: The mad doctor : Fri Mar 28, 2014 10:23 am  

It's pretty obvious that the bidding process would have been a complicated one. I don't imagine for one minute that any of the sensible bidders would have made simple cash offers to purchase the club, particularly with the RFL holding the veto. It's likely that all would have set out commitments that the bidders were prepared to undertake in terms of the future running of the club. Equally, I'd imagine that many were of the "take it or leave it" variety with few, if any, being keen to be drawn into a further round of bidding.

Re: The mad doctor : Fri Mar 28, 2014 10:24 am  

dboy wrote:

You are completely wrong.

It is totally the normal process that you make your best and final bid by the deadline date.

There is no process to allow a for further bids to be made after the deadline.

Yes there is, The administrators job is solely to secure the best price for the creditors, not to stick to an arbitrary process so that you can try and score points on an RL forum.

Once Lamb's bid failed they were in exactly the same position as when Moore's bid failed, before Mrs Koukash had even shown interest. You are demonstrably wrong

Re: The mad doctor : Fri Mar 28, 2014 10:33 am  

SmokeyTA wrote:

Yes there is, The administrators job is solely to secure the best price for the creditors,

It doesn't follow automatically that he'd be able to to that with the RFL effectively holding the veto though.

Re: The mad doctor : Fri Mar 28, 2014 10:40 am  

Clearwing wrote:

It doesn't follow automatically that he'd be able to to that with the RFL effectively holding the veto though.

That’s true and I don’t think its coincidence that after Lamb things moved very quickly in favour of one of the creditors.

Im just saying it isn’t a set process the administrator is bound to where you bid once and that’s it, especially when the preferred bidder dropped out. We know this is definitely the case because the opposite happened.

There is nothing wrong with Mrs Koukash asking to up her bid, the administrator is in his rights to not allow it.

Re: The mad doctor : Fri Mar 28, 2014 12:51 pm  

SmokeyTA wrote:

You are demonstrably wrong

Given that what I said happened, actually happened, I am, without a shadow of a doubt, demonstrably correct!

It was a bid process with a clearly stated "bid by" date, not an auction, where defeated bidders could "up" their offers.

Re: The mad doctor : Fri Mar 28, 2014 1:15 pm  

Magic Superbeetle wrote:

There hasn't been much (or any) back channel info coming out (look at the bullmania thread) - so anyone telling koukash he was unsuccessful would of been involved in the bid - whether rfl side or administrator side. The only other option was he decided to rule himself out based on hearsay ... So I will add a third option of him being a sucker for rumours if that's any better? Personally in that situation, I wouldn't post anything as definitive as what he did without it coming from somewhere I trust to be the correct information - and now he's gone back on that, so either he shouldn't of posted it because he hadn't been told, he posted it for his own gain, or he's a sucker for listening to rumours.

He's more than fine to canvas support for his bid (look at the resulting Mandy for bulls petition after all) but one and the other don't add up ... Unless he trusted someone telling him he was out of it when he shouldn't of listened

If he hasn't been told by anyone his bid was unsuccessful (other than hearsay, because there wasn't anything in the papers until they tweeted it) then that's poor form by the administrator ... But it's not anything to do with the rfl, they didn't even make it to rfl preferred bidder stage...

It sounds that, broadly speaking, we agree. Someone involved in dealing with the bids has told Marwan - unofficially - that the bid wasn't successful, but he's not heard anything officially. If this is true - and we only have Marwan's word for it, but I note that, thus far, neither of the other parties has denied it - then that is massively unprofessional. I've been involved - albeit at a fairly peripheral level - with bid processes in the past, and you expect to be kept informed of the progress of your bid: whether you're long-listed, short-listed, top two, failure, success, whatever. If this hasn't happened in this case, then he's right to draw attention to it. These are multi-million pound deals. It's not like you bidding for a Jedward CD on EBay.

Re: The mad doctor : Fri Mar 28, 2014 1:53 pm  

I'm amazed that people are surprised that it was just a PR stunt.

The Koukash name has been linked to almost every weekly RL story since the end of the season, and some before that.

He's doing his job to keep Salford up in the public eye. I'm sure when the next big thing crops up in SL, the Good Dr will have his name attached to it. It's free press for little to no cost.

Twitter is an excellent way of chirping in on any point. He has now created such a head of steam that if he tweeted on the Leeds Saints game tonight, which he has no actual connection to, the tweet will probably get more publicity than the result of the game.

It's something that happens in football and we should welcome it. It generates headlines and I'm fine with that. Call it mad, call it PR. It's all coverage. The bid alone generated further theories, could he drop Salford, could he loan players across, could he buy another club after Bradford to get more votes. But the one constant is his name and consequently Salfords are linked to pretty much all RL stories, regardless of their teams actual performance.

Re: The mad doctor : Mon Mar 31, 2014 10:31 pm  

http://www.sportinglife.com/rugby-leagu ... s-flanagan the good dr never gives up reminds me of des ex barrow chief that ended well I think wonder how many coaches he will end up with maybe one for each player all good fun

http://www.sportinglife.com/rugby-leagu ... s-flanagan the good dr never gives up reminds me of des ex barrow chief that ended well I think wonder how many coaches he will end up with maybe one for each player all good fun

Re: The mad doctor : Mon Mar 31, 2014 10:39 pm  

year of the viking wrote:

http://www.sportinglife.com/rugby-league/news/article/480/9242727/salford-target-harris-flanagan

the good dr never gives up reminds me of des ex barrow chief that ended well I think wonder how many coaches he will end up with maybe one for each player all good fun

Pee jars at the ready if Flanaghan gets involved! If you can't buy them, inject them?

Re: The mad doctor : Tue Apr 01, 2014 9:35 am  

dboy wrote:

Given that what I said happened, actually happened, I am, without a shadow of a doubt, demonstrably correct!

It was a bid process with a clearly stated "bid by" date, not an auction, where defeated bidders could "up" their offers.

Except it isn’t, because one ‘bid by’ date passed, and then another was chosen and new bids were made there were even brand new bidders. Its almost like the administrator themselves was in complete control of that process, and if they wanted to accept new bids they could, and if they didn’t they didn’t have to. Its like this arbitrary rule you have invented in your tiny little head never existed and that rules made in the tiny little heads of bitter and angry RL fans don’t bind independent administrators and they are free to negotiate the best settlement as they see fit.

You are demonstrably wrong, what you said couldn’t happen, did happen! The administrator could accept new bids, he did accept new bids.

HTH